Juglal And Others v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.22799 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.08.2025 Juglal and others ....Petitioners

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Singal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the impugned order dated 16.09.2022 (Annexure P-6) to the limited extent of fixing the date of regularization of petitioners as 09.01.2018, which is illegal and arbitrary on the part of the respondents as the petitioners are entitled to be regularized w.e.f. 08.08.2003 i.e. from the date of regularization of their junior persons who were regularized from the date of issuance of regularization policy dated 08.08.2003 (Annexure P-3) with all consequential benefits. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners w.e.f. 29.07.2011 i.e. from the date of issuance of regularization policy dated 29.07.2011 (Annexure P-7) with all consequential benefits.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that the petitioners are mainly aggrieved by the regularization of their juniors, who were regularized by respondent/Corporation w.e.f. 08.08.2003 in terms of policy dated 08.08.2003.The said junior persons have also filed a writ petition bearing CWP No.7533 of 2026, seeking regularization in terms of the aforesaid policy in the year 2003. The said writ petition was decided on 16.05.2018 and the respondent/Corporation has regularized the services of the petitioners therein from the date of regularization of their juniors i.e. 08.08.2003 and the petitioners in the aforementioned writ petition were granted all consequential benefits also. The respondent/Corporation challenged the judgment rendered by the Single Bench in CWP No.7533 of 2016, by filing an LPA No.1654 of 2018 and the same was dismissed on 10.04.2024. As such, the judgment dated 16.05.2018, attained finality and it became a binding precedent on the respondents.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Single Bench in CWP No.10071 of 2022, titled as Sanjeev Kumar vs State of Haryana and others, decided on 22.01.2025 and the impugned order passed by the respondent/Corporation on the legal notice served by the petitioners does not reflect proper application of mind and the case of the petitioners was not considered in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in Sanjeev Kumar's case (supra). 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate who is present in the Court accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and fairly submits that afresh speaking order would be passed dealing with all the issues raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition. 6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance. 7.

Without commenting anything on merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of. The petitioners are directed to file a comprehensive representation before the respondent/Corporation within a period of one month from today.

8.

The respondent/Corporation is directed to consider the comprehensive representation, if any, submitted by the petitioners and pass a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The respondent/Corporation shall ensure that the decision taken thereof be conveyed to the petitioners forthwith. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 07.08.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No